twitter

Guest Op-Eds

Master Manual guides regulation of Missouri River

Written by: John McMahon

We’ve been fighting the Flood of 2011 for nearly three weeks now. Throughout the basin, the losses to families and communities have been heart-wrenching and our hearts go out to all who have been impacted by this unfortunate and unprecedented event.

One of the most frequently asked questions we get in our call center is, “Why didn’t the Corps evacuate floodwaters sooner?” Simply put, the answer to that question is, “We did.” At the beginning of the runoff season we had the full capacity of our flood risk reduction storage available to us. The game-changer has been the prolonged, heavy rains we have received in Montana and in the Dakotas since mid-May.

The Missouri River main stem reservoir system, which spans 1770 miles and includes six dams and reservoirs, provides flood risk reduction for communities from Fort Peck, Mont. to St. Louis, Mo. It is operated in accordance with the Missouri River Master Manual.  The Master Manual includes a water control plan that helps guide how much water should be released, when, and for how long from the six reservoirs. It is based on hydrology models that consider variables like volume, timing, and the shape of snow and rainfall runoff, and is based on more than 100 years of historical runoff records (1898-2004).
 
In 1989, the Corps initiated a review of the Missouri River Master Manual in response to the first major drought the Basin had experienced since the system was built and the needs of communities along the River. Re-opening the manual provided an opportunity for the public to voice their views on how the Missouri River should be operated. It was a 14-year journey of study and debate on the long-term management of the river. The review entailed extensive and thorough scientific research and hundreds of public meetings. We received thousands of comments from various stakeholders, Congressional and State representatives, Tribes, interest groups and members of the general public throughout the basin.
 
The Master Manual was updated in 2004. The water control plan in the manual provides for the Corps to serve the purposes for which Congress authorized construction of the system.  These purposes include flood control, navigation, water supply, water quality, hydropower, irrigation, recreation, and fish and wildlife.  The Corps strives to balance operation of the system to serve these purposes. For the past year, the Corps has been operating the System solely for Missouri River flood risk reduction.
 
As required by the Endangered Species Act of 1973, during the course of the Master Manual Review and Update, the Corps consulted with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.  In its 2003 Amended Biological Opinion, the Service concluded that the Corps’ operation of the system jeopardized the continued existence of the endangered pallid sturgeon and two bird species.  However, the service provided an alternative to jeopardy that allows the Corps to continue to serve all of the authorized purposes.  In addition to several other elements, this alternative included modifications in reservoir releases.
In 2006, the Master Manual was again updated to reflect these flow modifications.  In accordance with the criteria in the manual, and in compliance with the Endangered Species Act, at no time during the past year has the system been operated for endangered or other native or introduced species. Our priority has been flood risk reduction.
 
Each fall, the Corps forecasts the regulation of the Missouri River main stem system with various runoff scenarios for the remainder of the current year, plus the following calendar year and publishes a draft  Annual  Operating Plan. We hold a series of public meetings in each state throughout the basin to solicit feedback on our planned operations. We use that input from the public when developing our Final Annual Operating Plan, which is typically finalized in December of every year.
 
During the spring, we hold another round of meetings to update the public on our operations. Public involvement and transparency are key components of our Annual Operating Plan. Further, monthly and weekly forecasts are completed as well as daily assessments.
 
These historic and unprecedented releases we have experienced in the basin have pushed us into unchartered territory with respect to releases. There is no doubt that the Missouri River will be a changed river following these historic flows. As the Corps conducts reviews of our emergency response efforts and management of the Missouri River during this historic flood event, we will be presented with yet another opportunity to solicit feedback from the public about our operations.
 
In the meantime, we remain committed to this flood fight. We’ve dispatched teams of experts all along the basin to construct temporary levees. We’ve issued millions of sandbags and numerous pumps to support local flood fight efforts, avoid loss of life, minimize damages and help impacted communities. We remain in close collaboration with city, county, state and federal agencies, the Tribes and congressional representatives and we will continue to do everything in our ability to assist communities throughout the duration of the Flood of 2011.

-Brig. Gen. John McMahon is commander of the Northwest Division of the Army Corps of Engineers.

This entry was posted in Guest Op-Eds, OPINION and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comments

  1. Thanks to GPE for getting the General to provide his statement. I understand his tough situation. I would have liked him to actually put the numbers concerning snowpack and rainfall in his report. By reading Montana newspapers Ive been able to truly understand how much moisture is heading our way. This is truly a historic event that maybe could have been responded to better by the corp but I am not sure how. No matter what happens the river and the communities along it will be forever changed.

  2. Well, if the corps had everything under control and knew the amount of runoff, then why did they keep changing the numbers? First they said they would release 50,000cfs; then 55,000; then 60,000; etc. Well, now they have bumped it all the way up to 150,000cfs, and that may not even be the limit.

    It appears as if the corps… A) Doesn’t have a clue about the amount of moisture in their watershed. (Otherwise, they could have stated the 150,000cfs release upfront.) Or, B) The corps has been repeatedly lying about the amount of moisture upstream, out of some misguided attempt at mitigating panic.

    Either of those scenarios will lead to public outrage.

    • You can’t control nature and weather. So everyone that is upset that they change flows and cfs’s needs to settle down. It is not an exact science. You cannot begin to know how much rain is going to flow into the many streams and rivers flowing into the Missouri. So they have to base it off of computer models and formulas. Then go into there protocol and do what it says to do. Its all averages and percentages based off of years of data. So its no ones fault! Everyone needs to stop blaming and just realize that its life and things like this are going to happen. I think the majority of the blame should be on home developers that started building homes along the river blame them! They should have done more research on elevations and flooding probabilities.

      • I realise this was the perfect storm with high snowpack and a major rain event but I still struggle with how they can be off so far on there numbers that they now need 300% release for 3 months to correct it? Mathmatically, and looking at the historical data, we were bound to flood but it did not need to be of this magnitude. The dams were built for flood control. Besides supplying water to the comunities along the river I feel all the other reasons, barge traffic, hydro-power, recreation, etc. are a result of the dams and should fall much lower on the PRIORITY list.
        I have a cabin on the river, and even though access is lost it should stay dry. As far as all the other idiots let it be known that even if your lot is 1 foot above the flood plain, if you dig hole 8 feet deep and put in a basement you should expect 7 feet of water during a flood. The longer you whine and hold back the release the higher its going to get. Instead of sand bagging around your house you should haul them down staires and fill in your basement so next time your prepared.

  3. It is seems to me that with over one hundred years of runoff records, high tech models, and updated protocal manuals studied by a team of expert engineers, that there should be some more responsibility taken. Being a North Dakota native, I have never been convinced that anybody should have to be completely responsible to predict weather. But for the same reason I think that there should have been an adequate allowance for an unusual amount of rain and snow runoff.

  4. I agree with Comando lando. Great comment.

  5. The basic fact is that the Missouri River flood control system , if properly used, could have prevented much of the misery now being suffered in the downstream states. In effect, the downstream states are being asked to pay the price of flood damage so that the upstream folks are guaranteed electric power, irrigation, recreation and the pallid sturgeon. The manual is nothing but a balancing of competing interests that is weighted in favor of upstream uses. The price tag of downstream loss will be enormous and should be compensated for by the Federal government.

  6. Excellent Blog !!!! Thanks for your info

  7. Pingback: All American Radio, Volume 3, Episode 5: The Flood | All American Blogger

Leave a Reply to wrigs Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Copyright © 2012 Great Plains Examiner All rights reserved.
209 Aspen Ave., Bismarck, North Dakota 58503, (701) 645-1270